Matthew Cotton , Stephen Langford , Anne Kuria , Karen Parkhill
{"title":"A technology to solve the water-energy-food crisis? Mapping sociotechnical configurations of agrivoltaics using Q-methodology","authors":"Matthew Cotton , Stephen Langford , Anne Kuria , Karen Parkhill","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>“Agrivoltaics” are solar photovoltaic panels mounted above productive farmland so that energy and food production can occur simultaneously on the same plot. Agrivoltaics are proffered as a means to reduce food-energy land use conflicts, and to ameliorate rural community opposition to ground-mounted solar farms. In this study we examine the socio-economic and environmental claims around agrivoltaics as a set of competing sociotechnical configurations, assessed through a Q-methodology and qualitative analysis of 30 responses from technical, NGO and social opposition respondents from 14 different countries. We find three emergent sociotechnical configurations, labelled: 1) Agrivoltaics for livelihood diversification and poverty alleviation; 2) Opposing agrivoltaics – asserting community control and procedural justice, and 3) Scaling up a ‘triple win’ for agrivoltaics – centring innovation and ownership models. We identify strong support for agrivoltaics in livelihood diversification across rural communities, and for meeting multiple food, energy and water security goals simultaneously. However, stakeholder opposition from technological intrusion of agrivoltaics in rural places and a lack of consensus on what role governmental authorities, landowners and community cooperatives can play are key barriers to deployment and upscaling of this niche technology. We find that agrivoltaics can stimulate diverse sociotechnical configurations of energy and agriculture, with great potential for improving energy and food security, though issues of visual intrusion and perceived ‘technology in the wrong place’, lack of clarity on funding and planning models, and improper scales of governance and procedural injustice could potentially stymie rollout for both smallholders and larger agribusiness schemes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"119 ","pages":"Article 103872"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624004638","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
“Agrivoltaics” are solar photovoltaic panels mounted above productive farmland so that energy and food production can occur simultaneously on the same plot. Agrivoltaics are proffered as a means to reduce food-energy land use conflicts, and to ameliorate rural community opposition to ground-mounted solar farms. In this study we examine the socio-economic and environmental claims around agrivoltaics as a set of competing sociotechnical configurations, assessed through a Q-methodology and qualitative analysis of 30 responses from technical, NGO and social opposition respondents from 14 different countries. We find three emergent sociotechnical configurations, labelled: 1) Agrivoltaics for livelihood diversification and poverty alleviation; 2) Opposing agrivoltaics – asserting community control and procedural justice, and 3) Scaling up a ‘triple win’ for agrivoltaics – centring innovation and ownership models. We identify strong support for agrivoltaics in livelihood diversification across rural communities, and for meeting multiple food, energy and water security goals simultaneously. However, stakeholder opposition from technological intrusion of agrivoltaics in rural places and a lack of consensus on what role governmental authorities, landowners and community cooperatives can play are key barriers to deployment and upscaling of this niche technology. We find that agrivoltaics can stimulate diverse sociotechnical configurations of energy and agriculture, with great potential for improving energy and food security, though issues of visual intrusion and perceived ‘technology in the wrong place’, lack of clarity on funding and planning models, and improper scales of governance and procedural injustice could potentially stymie rollout for both smallholders and larger agribusiness schemes.
期刊介绍:
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers.
Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.